Tribunal deletes house sale & interest additions, unsecured loan entries under Section 68, and interest levy under Section 234B.

The Tribunal deleted the additions on account of the sale of the house and interest earned due to lack of corroborative evidence. The additions on unsecured loans under Section 68 were deleted for all assessment years as no incriminating material was found during the search. The levy of interest under Section 234B was also deleted following the deletions of the principal additions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Addition on account of sale of a house.
2. Addition on account of interest earned.
3. Addition on account of unexplained unsecured loans under Section 68.
4. Levy of interest under Section 234B.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Addition on Account of Sale of a House:
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 75,00,000/- made on account of the sale of a house, based on undated and unsigned loose papers found during a search. The CIT(A) upheld the addition, relying on Section 292C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which presumes that documents found in possession during a search belong to the person and their contents are true. The assessee argued that no other corroborative evidence of the sale was found. The Tribunal noted that the loose papers were not in the assessee's handwriting, no sale deed was found, and no corroborative evidence was presented by the Revenue. The Tribunal concluded that the addition was unsustainable as it was based solely on uncorroborated loose papers.

2. Addition on Account of Interest Earned:
The assessee contested the addition of Rs. 13,00,000/- made on account of interest earned, again based on the same loose papers. The CIT(A) upheld the addition under Section 292C. The Tribunal found that no evidence of interest-bearing loans was found during the search, and the loose papers did not constitute sufficient evidence. The Tribunal directed the deletion of the addition due to the lack of corroborative material.

3. Addition on Account of Unexplained Unsecured Loans under Section 68:
The Assessing Officer (AO) made additions for several assessment years on account of unsecured loans under Section 68, which the CIT(A) deleted, following the decision in CIT Vs. Kabul Chawla. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that no incriminating material was found during the search to justify the additions. For A.Y. 2012-13, the AO made additions for loans received from various entities, but the CIT(A) deleted all except the loan from Chanson Pearl Hospitality, citing insufficient proof of creditworthiness. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient evidence, including ITRs, balance sheets, and confirmations, and thus directed the deletion of the addition.

4. Levy of Interest under Section 234B:
The CIT(A) upheld the levy of interest under Section 234B to the extent of the sustained additions. Given the Tribunal's decision to delete the additions on account of the sale of the house, interest earned, and unsecured loans, the levy of interest under Section 234B was also directed to be deleted.

Conclusion:
- The addition on account of the sale of the house and interest earned was deleted due to the lack of corroborative evidence.
- The addition on account of unsecured loans under Section 68 was deleted for all assessment years due to the absence of incriminating material found during the search.
- The levy of interest under Section 234B was also deleted in light of the deletions of the principal additions.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 07/03/2023.

---